No they didn't. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Sep 20, 2016, at 3:57 PM, Bruce Verhei <bver...@comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> I'm not sure if the efficacy of the model of a smoke detector inside the 
> (assault resistant) grill from each cell. 
> 
> But this doesn't pass a laugh test. Back calculate the from the high 
> sensitivity setting from the detector manual, then multiply that number by 
> Ed's 30 times dilution comment, and you are starting to get an idea of smoke 
> level in the cells. 
> 
> You haven't added a safety factor for dilution prior to smoke entering the 
> duct system, or that the self monitoring detector may be out of specs. And 
> all based on one detector?
> 
> I can't imagine the system operating before the turnkeys in the control booth 
> opened the manual control valve.
> 
> They did specify a second manual override to trip the valve in the control 
> booth, didn't they?
> 
> Best
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> On Sep 20, 2016, at 09:39, michael G <m...@keyfps.com> wrote:
> 
>> Absolutly, what we have been saying the entire time.  the return air is 
>> drawn at roughly 75 cfm if im not mistaken, the entire draw for the unit was 
>> in the range of 6500-8500 cfm.
>>  
>> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] 
>> On Behalf Of Ed Vining
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 12:32 PM
>> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>> Subject: Re: Pre-action detection
>>  
>> The need is to detect fire in a pod. Fire in a pod generates smoke. Air 
>> comes back from all pods.  The ventilation system dilutes the smoke from the 
>> fire pod.  By a factor of 30?  The concentration of smoke hitting the 
>> detector could be close to 3% of the concentration at the pod. Lack of  
>> detector listing is insignificant compared to the effect of dilution.
>>  
>> Wouldn't a wet system be nice? 
>>  
>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 8:14 AM, michael G <m...@keyfps.com> wrote:
>> No, they are back at the main return, that is it. just one duct detector, 
>> that covers about 30 cell pods.   They do not have any detectors in the 
>> grilles in the cell pods.   that’s our main concern.
>>  
>> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] 
>> On Behalf Of rongreenman .
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 11:07 AM
>> 
>> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>> Subject: Re: Pre-action detection
>>  
>> I am presuming the duct detectors are just inside the return air from the 
>> cells and the day rooms  and other common areas are high ceilinged with 
>> normal detectors or where ceilings are low the access is limited.
>>  
>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 7:54 AM, <craig.pr...@ch2m.com> wrote:
>> Where a fire alarm system is installed, duct detectors are an initiating 
>> device attached to and powered by the FACP system just as any other room 
>> detector.  It’s essentially a regular detector head with tubes placed in an 
>> enclosure. 
>>  
>> Here’s a quote to chew on from the book, Operation of Fire Protection 
>> Systems:
>> “The detection of duct smoke is made difficult by its dilution with return 
>> air from other spaces (away from the fire) and possibly with outside fresh 
>> air.  Also, when the HVAC system fan is not running, smoke may not reach the 
>> duct detector. For these reasons, air duct smoke detectors must never be 
>> considered as a substitute for open area protection.”
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> 
>> Craig L. Prahl 
>> Fire Protection Group Lead/SME
>> CH2M
>> 200 Verdae Blvd. 
>> Greenville, SC  29607
>> Direct - 864.920.7540
>> Fax - 864.920.7129
>> CH2MHILL Extension  77540
>> craig.pr...@ch2m.com
>> 
>>  
>> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] 
>> On Behalf Of Parsley Consulting
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 10:22 AM
>> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>> Subject: Re: Pre-action detection [EXTERNAL]
>>  
>> Greg,
>>     The first issue that came to my mind was that the duct detector is 
>> frequently provided with power from the HVAC system and not from the FACU or 
>> releasing panel.  I don't know the logistics of what you're dealing with or 
>> whether that issue might have some impact however that might be worth 
>> looking into.  I have to admit I'd never heard of something like this.  That 
>> by itself doesn't mean it's outside the listing or the guidance in -72 or 
>> -13, just that I've never run across this configuration.
>> Ken Wagoner, SET
>> Parsley Consulting
>> 350 West 9th Avenue, Suite 206
>> Escondido, California 92025
>> Phone 760-745-6181
>> Visit our website
>> On 09/20/2016 6:28 AM, Gregg Key wrote:
>> Greetings,
>>  
>>                               First of all, what a great convention. Good 
>> speakers and fellowship. Nashville was awesome as well. I am in serious need 
>> of some technical assistance. I have posted this a few times with some 
>> response but this has become a three ring circus between the architect ,fire 
>> marshal and us . The Architect specified a double interlock pre-action 
>> system with the detection being provided with a duct detector in the return 
>> duct at the unit. We have refused to certify the system due the fact that 
>> the detector not being listed for this application. State is asking me to 
>> hang a partial certification ( yellow tag) . has anyone else dealt with this 
>> detection being used for a pre-action system in a detention center?   Any 
>> help would be appreciated  
>>  
>> Gregg Key
>> General Manager
>> Key Fire Protection Enterprises,LLC
>> 3200 Mike Padgett Hwy
>> Augusta GA, 30906
>> O-706-790-3473
>> C- 706-220-8821
>> F- 706-738-2119
>> gr...@keyfps.com
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sprinklerforum mailing list
>> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
>>  
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sprinklerforum mailing list
>> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>  
>> --
>> Ron Greenman
>> 
>> 4110 Olson Dr., NW
>> Gig Harbor, WA 98335
>> 
>> rongreen...@gmail.com
>> 
>> 253.576.9700
>>  
>> The Universe is monstrously indifferent to the presence of man. -Werner 
>> Herzog, screenwriter, film director, author, actor and opera director (1942-)
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. 
>> www.avast.com
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sprinklerforum mailing list
>> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>  
>> --
>> Ed Vining
>> 4819 John Muir Rd
>> Martinez CA 94553
>> 925-228-8792
>> Cell 925-787-0465
>>  
>> 
>> 
>>                                              
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. 
>> www.avast.com
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sprinklerforum mailing list
>> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
> _______________________________________________
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Reply via email to